[PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C Lite

[FUKAUMI Naoki]

Hi Dragan,

On 12/11/24 15:36, Dragan Simic wrote:
> Hello Fukaumi,
> 
> On 2024-12-11 07:09, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
>> The Radxa ROCK 5C Lite uses a different SoC (RK3582) compared to the
>> Radxa ROCK 5C (RK3588S2), but the two are compatible from a software
>> perspective.
>>
>> Fixes: df4e08a5eed1 ("dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki at radxa.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> index 753199a12923..2254ee079094 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml
>> @@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ properties:
>>            - const: radxa,rock-5b
>>            - const: rockchip,rk3588
>>
>> -      - description: Radxa ROCK 5C
>> +      - description: Radxa ROCK 5C/5C Lite
>>          items:
>>            - const: radxa,rock-5c
>>            - const: rockchip,rk3588s
> 
> I think it would be better to use "rockchip,rk3582" here, to allow
> us to possibly use that information later.  For example, we might
> want to be able to recognize RK3582-based boards in U-Boot without
> the need to look into the e-fuses at some point, for which purpose
> having a clear designator in the DT would fit perfectly.

It may be okay to introduce "rockchip,rk3582", but reading e-fuse is 
still required in U-Boot because which unit (cpu coreX, gpu, etc) is 
broken cannot be determined without reading e-fuse at run-time.

Best regards,

--
FUKAUMI Naoki
Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.

> As a reminder, using "rockchip,rk3582" would also require a small
> addition to drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c.
>